SHRI SITA RAM SHARMA S/O- SHRI JAGDISH NARAYAN SHARMA, BHORILAL PUJARI KI DHANI, VILLAGE-GONER, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-7(2), JAIPUR, WARD-7(2), JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 736/JPR/2019Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 July 2019AY 2010-113 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found no infirmity in the addition made by the AO as the assessee failed to explain the source of the cash deposit. Since the assessee did not appear before the Tribunal either, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an ex parte order for AY 2010-11. The assessee did not appear before the Assessing Officer (AO) or the CIT(A) despite opportunities. The AO made an addition of Rs. 11,63,500/- on account of unexplained cash deposited in a bank account.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition on account of unexplained cash deposit is justified when the assessee failed to appear and provide an explanation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC

Before: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMAvk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 736/JP/2019

Hearing: 23/07/2019Pronounced: 23/07/2019

ORDER PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the ex parte order of ld.CIT(A)-3, Jaipur dated 13/03/2019 for the A.Y. 2010-11 in the matter of ex parte order passed U/s 144/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act).

2.

No body has appeared on behalf of the assessee in spite of service of notice. From the record, I found that the assessee had not appeared before the A.O. even after giving so much opportunity, therefore, the 2 ITA 736/JP/2019 Sita Ram Sharma Vs ITO A.O. finally passed order U/s 144 of the Act. I found that even before the ld. CIT(A) in spite of giving so much opportunities, no body appeared before him on behalf of the assessee, accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Even in respect of merits of the addition, I found that the addition was made on account of cash of Rs. 11,63,500/- found to be deposited in the bank account maintained with ING Vasya Bank, C-Scheme, Jaipur. Nothing was placed before me so as to persuade me to deviate from the findings so recorded by the A.O.. Accordingly, I do not find any infirmity in the addition so made in respect of cash deposit in the bank account. The source of could not be explained by the assessee.

3.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 23rd July, 2019

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →